>> Instead, by not collecting data, they found themselves answering an overly narrow question: does this impact user privacy?
What makes them out of touch is that these were apparently the only criteria that needed to be met. As opposed to, say, "how would people feel if we took our software, which occupies a space in their workflow that demands a lot of trust, and auto-updated it with a marketing campaign for a TV show?"
I mean, if they wanted to answer the question "how many of our users like Big Bird?", and they crafted a pop-up survey to be delivered through this mechanism that did not impact user privacy, would that get the green light?
It's not just about respecting user privacy and safeguarding data, it's about adhering to expectations. The fact that there was apparently not a single human in the loop with the power to stop this from rolling out that recognized this is concerning, and the fact that there's no mention of it in this blog post is doubly so. What people want to hear is not just "we will safeguard your data", it's "we will never waste your time or introduce any kind of risk by pushing things like marketing campaigns into your trusted software."
Yes, absolutely. Hence my describing it as an overly narrow question.
My point is precisely that, in going the SHIELD route, they selected for people who would ask that narrow question, because that's what they're usually concerned with, rather than the bigger questions they should've been asking.
What makes them out of touch is that these were apparently the only criteria that needed to be met. As opposed to, say, "how would people feel if we took our software, which occupies a space in their workflow that demands a lot of trust, and auto-updated it with a marketing campaign for a TV show?"
I mean, if they wanted to answer the question "how many of our users like Big Bird?", and they crafted a pop-up survey to be delivered through this mechanism that did not impact user privacy, would that get the green light?
It's not just about respecting user privacy and safeguarding data, it's about adhering to expectations. The fact that there was apparently not a single human in the loop with the power to stop this from rolling out that recognized this is concerning, and the fact that there's no mention of it in this blog post is doubly so. What people want to hear is not just "we will safeguard your data", it's "we will never waste your time or introduce any kind of risk by pushing things like marketing campaigns into your trusted software."